New Orleans schools are so bad that parents who want their children to be educated must pay for private school. So assert Gregory and Maria Guth, parents who are suing the school district, demanding reimbursement of their son’s private school tuition if he’s unable to continue at his magnet school.
Franklin is among the city’s few “citywide access” schools, often called “magnet schools.” They are among the state’s best, but the schools have a limited number of slots for students and those slots are highly sought after.Most other schools are far inferior, judging from the state’s 2002 accountability rankings. Of 119 New Orleans schools listed, 105 are ranked below the state average. Of those, 50 are considered “academically unacceptable.”
Guth wants to make the suit a class action.
I don’t quite understand this lawsuit. Jacob didn’t maintain a C average but he’s being allowed to continue in his magnet school; under probation, I guess, but if he can’t do better than a D average this year as well, he really doesn’t belong there. So what’s to sue about? No wonder they’re not getting many takers on their lawsuit.
I think the idea behind the suit is that, even in the non-magnet schools, the state has an obligation to provide a reasonable level of education, and that they are not doing so.
Well, the thing is, the kid is not in one of the non-magnet schools. He probably will be if he doesn’t get his grade above a D average, but he isn’t now. So what exactly are they suing for?
Besides which, some of the schools are not failing. Even if most are, some are not. People are free to move into areas that are served by non-failing schools.
I do agree that it’s a tragedy that some kids are failed by their schools. On the other hand, I do not think that the public school system is singly responsible for all the problems in public education. Misbehaving and uncaring students are a problem. Unprepared students who have no support at home are a problem. Uninvolved parents (or parents who are involved in a destructive way) are a problem. Schools can provide a reasonable education all day long, but if the kids can’t or won’t take advantage of it, then the schools will fail.
The state offers a “free” (taxpayer-provided) education to every child. Parents may avail themselves of it, or they may choose another option.
I wonder if this family has considered the impact on their taxes if their class-action suit really gets somewhere.
Well, first off, Jacob does not have a D average, he has a C- average (1.9) and is supposed to have a C average (2.0) to continue at Franklin. It sounds like the Guths were worried about how Jacob would fare at the regular public school he would otherwise be going to.
The state offers a “free” (taxpayer-provided) education to every child. Parents may avail themselves of it, or they may choose another option.
I expect that the actual lawsuit questions if the state (more accurately, the parish) is providing a free education, or if it’s more of a free babysitting service. There’s not much detail on the wording of the suit, but it probably comes down to what the board of ed (or equivalent) promises to provide in return for large quantities of taxpayer dollars.
When you think about it, it’s pretty silly to have the board of ed collect the taxes and then also spend them; that is the way most school districts are run, though. It’s not like we have a “board of garbage collection”, a “board of road construction”, or a “board of parks & recreation” usually. As with these other entities, a more sensible approach would be to have an authority that collects the taxes, and then one or more separate entities that provide the service. This still might not let parents choose schools (in fact, such a system might be indistiguishable from the current arrangement), but it would provide some automatic oversight when it came time for the school authority to renew the education provider(s) contract(s).
The Guths’ lawsuit seems to be trying to implement something like Jeb Bush’s “vouchers to escape bad schools” system via the courts. I’d be surprised if it works, but I wish them luck.
I wonder if this family has considered the impact on their taxes if their class-action suit really gets somewhere.
Even if their taxes double, the Guth’s will be better off than having to pay private school tuition and school taxes. But the usual arrangement with vouchers is that they are less than the per-pupil cost; as a result, the more kids which use the vouchers, the lower the school district’s expenses become.
Hey — that’s my alma mater they’re talking about.
The suit, if it is accurately described in the AJC (and I can’t imagine it is) is going nowhere.
> He probably will be if he doesn’t get his grade above a D average, but he isn’t now. So what exactly are they suing for?
In other words, he’s a crappy student so he deserves a crappy school?
This sort of “honesty” isn’t good policy, or even good argument.
> People are free to move into areas that are served by non-failing schools.
This “let them eat cake” attitude is going to be the death of public education as we know it. (Marie thought that they had cake.)
> I wonder if this family has considered the impact on their taxes if their class-action suit really gets somewhere.
Note the assumption - the existing wasteful spending is going to be preserved at all costs, so if there’s added expense, something else will have to give.
This “let them eat cake” attitude is going to be the death of public education as we know it.
Promise?
(Marie thought that they had cake.)
Sorry to have to burst your bubble, but Marie Antoinette didn’t say that.
“In other words, he’s a crappy student so he deserves a crappy school?”
I didn’t say he’s a crappy student. He’s probably in a challenging program, and he may be in over his head. If so, he doesn’t belong there; it’s wasting his time and damaging his self-esteem (and I’m not being sarcastic. It’s bad for a kid to be in a program that’s too difficult for him, when he could be successful in a program one level down.) However, he is currently enrolled in the school his parents want him in. I still do not understand what they are suing about. I don’t think you can sue over something that might have happened, but didn’t.
A lot of the problems in the schools were caused, directly or indirectly, by white flight. (This is a slightly misleading name, because as minority populations have become more affluent, they’ve flown too.) Of course, it’s people’s right to pull their kids out of public school and educate them any way they want. But what that means is that some schools may be on the failing list because the kids who could have brought the scores up and the grading curves down aren’t there anymore. Thus the average scores will be below the state average. The city can’t do anything about that.
From the article: “Guth wants the court to declare his lawsuit a class action that will involve all Orleans Parish taxpayers who have had children in private schools in the last 10 years.” And if they get their way, exactly how will reimbursing all private school expenditures over the past 10 years not affect local taxes? Of course, lots of people who had their kids in private schools did it by choice and aren’t asking for reimbursement.
> A lot of the problems in the schools were caused, directly or indirectly, by white flight.
Wrong. NONE of the problems were caused by parents who took their kids elsewhere.
The problems are caused by the school and the parents of kids who are still there (often with “enabling” by said school).
Public schools need to stop blaming, and trying to punish, folks who decide not to sacrifice their kids. Said parents do NOT owe public schools anything.
BTW - one of the factors that encourages flight is this blame/punish/owe belief system. In other words, it’s not only wrong, it’s counter-productive, unless, of course, the goal is to find a scapegoat….
> But what that means is that some schools may be on the failing list because the kids who could have brought the scores up and the grading curves down aren’t there anymore.
Consider two schools. Neither teaches anyone, but one has higher average scores because some of its students are taught by their parents.
According to the above analysis, one school is failing while the other isn’t. Since that’s clearly not true, the analysis is wrong.
You don’t improve schools by adding students who succeed despite the school. You don’t hurt schools by removing students who suceed despite the school.
Public school defenders are the best argument for completely dismantling the public school system.
Of course, lots of people who had their kids in private schools did it by choice and aren’t asking for reimbursement.
Um, Laura, all the people who sent their kids to private schools did so by choice. I don’t even understand what you were thinking when you wrote that; we must be coming from different premises. (And the parents may not be asking for reimbursement, but I’m sure most’d be glad to accept it! Though I’m not clear the suit asks for reimbursement so much as changes going forward.)
…when he could be successful in a program one level down.
I think one of his parents’ complaints is that the next level down from Franklin is way way down. There’s no mention of tracking at Franklin, so I guess Jacob is either in the “normal” track, or Franklin only has one program. Dropping down one level then means going to his local school, which is apparently well below the state average.
A lot of the problems in the schools were caused, directly or indirectly, by white flight.
The phrase “white flight” implies that white families send their kids to private, non-integrated schools for racist reasons. I would hope that’s not a consideration in 2003, and in a parish that the census says is 67% black.
Using the census figures, I get 95,965 kids between the ages of 5 and 17 (inclusive); that’s taking the 2001 pop estimate and multiplying it by 19.8% (26.7% under 18 less 6.9% under 5). This page says the New Orleans Public Schools (is that the same as the Orleans parish school system?) had 75,223 students enrolled in 2000-2001. So about 22% of kids are not in the public system.
It’d be nice to break that 22% down by race, but I don’t see how on the data I can find. If you take the 95,965 count of school-age kids and multiply it by the 67.3% black the census provides, you get 64,584, which is 4300 fewer black kids than the school system says it has (enrollment of 75,223 times 91.6% black). So black families must have noticeably more kids than white families. We can probably guess that the 22% is mostly white, given the large number of blacks (91.6%) in the public schools; however, this may be more a factor of the parents’ education and income than their race.
Still, we can note that the NOPS only has to educate 78% of the kids in its district, so it has 28% more money per student than it would if no one sent their kids to private schools.
…kids who could have brought the scores up and the grading curves down aren’t there anymore. Thus the average scores will be below the state average. The city can’t do anything about that.
Laura suggests that kids are predestined to score as they do on state tests, and the private schools are only taking top students. If this is true, I guess we might as well throw up our hands and give up. But maybe better schools can make kids into better students, and maybe the private schools aren’t better schools solely because they limit themselves to top students. In which case, an injection of more choice (through vouchers or whatever) would lead to an improvement in the students of Orleans parish.
Well, here’s what I meant by “choice”: There is an excellent magnet school for elementary students in our city. Some neighbor kids went there. Our daughter certainly would have qualified. We “chose” to send her to a parochial school for reasons other than academic. That’s a bit different from sending her to a private school because the only public alternative was unthinkable. It appears that the Guths want parents like us to be reimbursed too. I’ve never asked for that. I wouldn’t.
You’re assuming a whole lot about the school that Jacob would be going to, if he were not in the magnet program. The article says nothing about that. Maybe it’s an abysmal failure, or maybe it just isn’t wonderful.
Our city is about 50/50 black and white. The public school population is about 9% white. White flight occurred in this city in the 1970’s, when federal courts mandated that kids be bussed all over the city to attend schools that their parents knew nothing about. It was a huge mess; my husband was bussed to three different schools in one semester and dropped out after that year (10th grade). At least he took the GED; others didn’t. Private schools sprung up all over, and there was a mad rush to the county. Black parents didn’t like it either, and as I said before, many of them did and do opt out of the public school system when they can (although bussing is over and we have limited open enrollment now). Of course, it’s every parent’s right to do that, and I’d do it in a heartbeat if I thought my kid’s best interest required it. The main problem with white flight, as I see it, is that when people withdraw from the public school system they tend to forget about it, even though their taxes are going into it. It’s the only explanation I can come up with for the appallingly low voter turnout in school board elections, which partially explains the selection of clowns we get. I have to think that if everybody cared, we’d vote for better people.
“Consider two schools. Neither teaches anyone, but one has higher average scores because some of its students are taught by their parents.
“According to the above analysis, one school is failing while the other isn’t. Since that’s clearly not true, the analysis is wrong.”
I agree with you 150%. It’s my understanding that under NCLB, the analysis is performed that way. I don’t like it either. I imagine (there, I’m doing it too) that Jacob’s parents want the NCLB definition of “failing school” to prevail.
What I see happening if they get their way, is parents wanting to send their kids to pricey private schools, realizing they live in (or even moving to) a neighborhood with a “failing school” and asking the city to cough up the tuition; when maybe they could manage it themselves with a little sacrifice. I drove a 10-year-old Pontiac with the paint coming off of it in sheets, to keep my kid in the parochial elementary school we chose.
“Laura suggests that kids are predestined to score as they do on state tests, and the private schools are only taking top students.” Well, ha ha, maybe “predestined” is too strong a word, but it’s true that private schools and magnet schools are free to cherrypick, and that the public schools have to take everyone. Given that people are free (as we should be) to select options other than public school for our kids, and also that kids in different neighborhood schools are not going to have the same socioeconomic status, because the neighborhoods themselves don’t, it’s unrealistic to suppose that every school’s test score averages are going to be at the fiftieth percentile. As far as academics go, the question I would ask is, can MY CHILD be educated to the limit of her ability and her ambition in this school? Then to heck with the average scores.
> It appears that the Guths want parents like us to be reimbursed too. I’ve never asked for that. I wouldn’t.
Then don’t take the money. Heck - feel free to voluntarily pay more.
But, money for you is not the issue. You don’t want anyone to have the ability to make a different decision.
> What I see happening if they get their way, is parents wanting to send their kids to pricey private schools, realizing they live in (or even moving to) a neighborhood with a “failing school” and asking the city to cough up the tuition; when maybe they could manage it themselves with a little sacrifice.
And, maybe they can’t afford it. Screw them, right?
And, even if they can afford it, why should they pay twice to get their kids a decent education?
Why are you so damned insistent on throwing more money into something that simply doesn’t work?
> The main problem with white flight, as I see it, is that when people withdraw from the public school system they tend to forget about it, even though their taxes are going into it.
You’re still blaming folks who aren’t involved for the problems caused by those who are.
> It’s the only explanation I can come up with for the appallingly low voter turnout in school board elections, which partially explains the selection of clowns we get. I have to think that if everybody cared, we’d vote for better people.
Why should they care? Folks like you still haven’t figured out that you’re the problem.
Most people who want me to fix their problems usually have enough clue to figure out that they need to give me something that I want in return.
What are you offering?
“> It appears that the Guths want parents like us to be reimbursed too. I’ve never asked for that. I wouldn’t.
Then don’t take the money. Heck - feel free to voluntarily pay more.
But, money for you is not the issue. You don’t want anyone to have the ability to make a different decision.”
Do you understand what I’m saying? Some of us who chose private school didn’t do it for academic reasons. We did it because by law, the government is not allowed to give our children what we want (religious education). Why should the city reimburse us for our tuition?
Some of us who chose private school didn’t do it for academic reasons. We did it because by law, the government is not allowed to give our children what we want (religious education). Why should the city reimburse us for our tuition?
1) Because you’re saving the school system money by educating your kid elsewhere.
2) The school district can save money by reimbursing only low-income people, but then they need to find out everyone’s income, and there will be some stigma to accepting money from the district.
3) If it makes you feel better, why not look at it as the schol dsitrict reimbursing you for your taxes, not your tuition costs.
I think asking why the city should reimburse you is comparable to asking “why should the city pay public school teachers to (try to) teach my kids?”
But PJ, they want to go back 10 years. That money is spent and gone. This isn’t vouchers they’re talking about.
The thing that I keep running into here is that poor people pay taxes too. They pay sales taxes, if they have a car they pay vehicle registration fees, and they pay property taxes too - even if they rent, because if the property taxes go up then their landlords raise their rents. It looks to me like the Guths want all citizens of NO, rich and poor, to retroactively have supported 2 school systems for the past 10 years. Even people who in their wildest dreams could never have afforded private school for their kids will see their tax dollars go to both public schools and people who sent their kids to private schools. And this will be to the benefit of people who demonstrably could afford to pay the tuition in the first place. And y’all talk about me wanting them to eat cake.
> Do you understand what I’m saying?
Yes, I understand. That’s why I’m able to say that Laura is wrong.
It is interesting that Laura is one of the people who she blames for ruining public schools. Remember, she blames folks who took their kids out of public schools for the failings of said public schools, and guess where her kids went to school….
Of course, this raises a question. Is her opposition to the same school choice for elementary, middle, and high school that we currently have for college due to guilt (for ruining said public schools) or does she want her kids to have opportunities that poorer kids don’t have….
Andy, it would be nice if you could offer arguments as opposed to making up evil motives for me. Rush Limbaugh says that when liberals can’t argue with you they question your motives. I guess he’s right.
I do not blame parents for white flight. If I’d had a kid in public schools here in the 1970’s, I’d have done the same thing. I wish to heck my in-laws had. Sometimes people make individual decisions that are right for them, but that in the aggregate are destructive through no fault of their own. I blame the federal courts for systematically destroying the public school system by bussing for desegregation. It obviously didn’t work; schools are now more segregated than before, and there is now no chance of reversing this. The problem of white flight; or if that term bothers you, affluent flight; is that people in the community who might have some idea of how to solve the problem and who might elect school board members who could run the schools competently, have dissociated themselves from the public school system. I do vote in school board elections. And I always have, even when my kid was in private elementary school. I, Andy, am not the problem.
If you want vouchers, fine, let’s all start out fresh so that everyone has the same chance. I’m not opposing school choice. I am opposing retroactively giving school choice to people who over the past ten years apparently didn’t need the help.
> Andy, it would be nice if you could offer arguments as opposed to making up evil motives for me.
I did, but Laura never bothered to respond. She just kept up with the “they didn’t sacrifice enough, so they should be punished” claptrap.
Laura blames folks who took their kids out of public school. She also doesn’t have much sympathy for kids of folks whose parents didn’t
manage to do so, while coyly mentioning her hairshirt.
It’s fair to ask why she’s such a fan of public schools, and my questions about her reasons for doing so have the advantage of being consistent with the facts in evidence.
I note that she didn’t answer the question….
“I do not blame parents for white flight. If I’d had a kid in public schools here in the 1970’s, I’d have done the same thing. I wish to heck my in-laws had.”
How is this me blaming parents who take their kids out of school?
And I don’t know what question you’re talking about. Is it this? “Is her opposition to the same school choice for elementary, middle, and high school that we currently have for college due to guilt (for ruining said public schools) or does she want her kids to have opportunities that poorer kids don’t have….” Is this not an answer: “If you want vouchers, fine, let’s all start out fresh so that everyone has the same chance. I’m not opposing school choice. I am opposing retroactively giving school choice to people who over the past ten years apparently didn’t need the help.”
I’m going to play your game, Andy, and then I’m done with this. Over the past 10 years in NO, there are parents who actually made some personal choices about their kids’ education, for whatever reasons they dared to have, and inexplicably managed to implement those choices without involving the government. Apparently they were able to afford to do that, since they did it. But you cannot stand to think that anybody can do anything without Nanny Government holding their hand. You want the city of NO to create a new program with city taxes (that’s money out of the pockets of the citizens, rich and poor), so that it can run after those people and say, “Here! Here! You shouldn’t have tried to to that without my help!” Because you can’t stand it that anyone shoould take responsibility for their family.
Laura is either arguing with herself or has learned something, if only that it’s a bad idea to write that parents who took their kids out of public schools did wrong.
Let’s review where she started.
> A lot of the problems in the schools were caused, directly or indirectly, by white flight.
and
> The main problem with white flight, as I see it, is that when people withdraw from the public school system they tend to forget about it, even though their taxes are going into it. It’s the only explanation I can come up with for the appallingly low voter turnout in school board elections, which partially explains the selection of clowns we get. I have to think that if everybody cared, we’d vote for better people.
Does she now disagree with those statements?
> But you cannot stand to think that anybody can do anything without Nanny Government holding their hand.
Huh?
Govt took their money. I can’t change that, so I advocate giving it back. And, going forward, I think that govt should NOT take their money.
That’s opposition to the nanny state combined with awareness that said nanny state exists.
Of course, Laura’s real problem is that she needs an argument. She tried an appeal to authority and now she’s inventing strawmen.
what problems other than state funding causes new orleans to have such a poor public school system?
I feel that the lawsuit is very well warranted, additionally, I would like to become a part of class action law suit. I am currently experiencing the very same problems associated with the public school system here in New Orleans. I just recently enrolled my daughter in a citywide access school and the teacher along with the principal have not a clue as to HOW to assist my daughter in being successful academically as she has been diagnosed with dyslexia. I continue to schedule meetings with her teachers and ONLY A FEW REALLY HAVE A PLAN OF ACTION to assist my daughter. My daughter has been in private school up until this year. Her father died and we were unable to financially afford the tuition. I am continually frustrated and my daughter’s self esteem is at an extreme low. The teachers tell me that there is so much pressure on them to remain on schedule with the lessons that they are losing the ability to focus on the actual child. It is my understanding that all public schools should be on the same schedule with their lesson plans, using the same material. Well, my daughter’s algebra teacher has NEVER used the algebra book to teach. Instead, she makes copies of worksheets and use that material to teach the students. I am unable to keep up with what or how she is teaching. So I praise the Guth family for taking on the New Orleans Public School system.